I started photography right on the cusp of the "digital revolution". In design school, we shot color film, had it processed and scanned the negs. I felt cheated. As a combat cameraman in the Marines, the year I got to my first duty station, was the first year they used their darkroom as a storage closet. I finally bought a home darkroom setup and learned to process and print black and white film.
I love it. I love the print. People say that you can do anything digital that you can do with film. Even my boss, a vietnam veteran combat cameraman who tells stories of souping film in combat helmets by a river on a moonless night, says I'm wasting my time in the darkroom. I still maintain that there is a difference in the final print. That's the thing. People are so used to looking at pictures on Flickr and in e-mails that they forget that it's the print that matters. Maybe it's not better or worse, I just think it's more artsy. I've seen tutorials on how to get that film look. I've got your tutorial: "Shoot film" Don't get me wrong. I still shoot digital, but you wont catch me trying to get the film look with it. By no means would it make sense for your average portrait, commercial, or wedding photographer to shoot film. It just costs too much for the consumables and takes way too much time to do any kind of volume. But for those who still want a beautiful silver gelatin print, it becomes that much more valuable.
The root of my belief is back in design school when we shot color film to scan. People would take the beautiful blues and greens of Fuji Velvia and desaturate in Photoshop. What a waste. I believe in exploiting the inherent qualities of a media to create a product that matches your vision. For the longest time, I never shot black and white film or even converted color pictures to black and white. I thought "why would you waste all that beautiful color!" I gradually started to see artists using black and white for a mood, texture or just a feeling. Now I wish I could do more. One of the challenges I'm facing is that it is more time consuming. With a young family and home to keep up, I havent had time to work in the darkroom in months!
Check out this blog from Black Star Rising: http://rising.blackstar.com/the-digital-influence-2.html
He talks about teaching out of date processes in design school where the digital revolution has replaced many techniques with many more precise tools. Photography is a different animal where precision isnt paramount. Take Holga cameras or "lomo photography" for example. They have quite the cult following for a camera known for light leaks and unreliable plastic lenses. They make some beautiful art though. People exploit the inherent characteristics of those cameras for their artistic purposes.
I recently wrote a comment in a Flickr group about how I'm bummed film seems to be going by the wayside. Someone replied "Ah, nostalgia. In any case, you can make arguments like these every time a disruptive technology affects a particular field..." I guess he's right. Maybe it is just nostalgia, but I'm banking on people looking at the classic techniques and embracing them for what they truly are. Art. A true craft. Not just "technology" to be replaced.
Here's a recent article in the NY Times about a photographer using antique processes.
Eventually I'd like to get into the real antique and "alternative" processes like Platinum printing. Check this guy out: http://www.garyauerbach.com/ He's got an exhibit in the Tucson Airport. $800 for an 8X10 inch print! $1000 for an 11X14! They're beautiful prints though. It's expensive to get into, but rewarding on the flip side. Not to say that I wont keep my studio set up in my living room to take those obnoxious pictures of JJ with my D200. Not to say that I dont crave that new D3, or 10 wireless flashes to go with it, but there has to be a balance.
My favorite film picture to date. It almost seems like it could have been taken when the car was new.
No comments:
Post a Comment